Metol Field Test Reliability

kukukajoob · 03-24-05, 20:11

Can anyone who is experienced at field identification of wild mushrooms vouch for the reliability of using photographer's formulary Metol [a developing chemical: p-methylamino-phenol sulfate] in an aqueous solution as an indicator [solution turns blue] to rule out toxic or inactive look alikes in genuses galerina, inocybe, clitocybe, panaeolus, etc?

shobimono · 03-24-05, 23:50

Would highly recommend against this. I would think it would be highly unreliable and very dangerous. The problem is you would have to test each mushroom. There are lookalikes and it would be foolhardy to test 1 mushroom and assume the mushroom growing next to it is the same if you don't know how to id mushrooms. (Which doesn't sound like you are confident enough to trust your identification or else you wouldn't be asking about this test)

Learn to identify mushrooms, dont depend on shortcuts or you are just asking for trouble., and a mistake can hurt or even kill you.

destroy_erase_improve · 03-25-05, 00:59

shob is right
even really experienced field mushroom hunters have a hard time properly identifying every strain. and since some are harmful to us, its better to play it on the safe side

kukukajoob · 03-25-05, 01:28

No doubt each mushroom collected in the wild would require individual identification just to make sure you didn't pick a toxic specimen hiding along side the medicinal ones. One would expect to make good use of a field guide, spore prints, etc and just use the metol test as a backup; not to replace the need to know how to correctly ID.

The metol field test is recommended in an article on id methods by myclologist John W. Allen on the shroomery website:
http://www.shroomery.org/index/par/24343/pag/7

The article implies this an effective testing method but only covers it briefly. I'm just looking for anecdotal reports from anyone who has used this tech in the field and can add to the available data. Certainly the cautionary is well taken; one accidental ingestion of a galerina marginata would end one's career as an amateur mycologist.

[Home]	[The Vaults]	[Glossary]	[Donate]	[Sponsors]	[Affiliates]
[Calendar]	Mark Forums Read	[VIP Chat]	[Register]	[Activate]	[Resend Email]

03-24-05, 20:11	#1 (permalink)
kukukajoob Mycophiliac Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 31	Metol Field Test Reliability Can anyone who is experienced at field identification of wild mushrooms vouch for the reliability of using photographer's formulary Metol [a developing chemical: p-methylamino-phenol sulfate] in an aqueous solution as an indicator [solution turns blue] to rule out toxic or inactive look alikes in genuses galerina, inocybe, clitocybe, panaeolus, etc?

03-25-05, 00:59	#3 (permalink)
destroy_erase_improve Mycotopiate Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 2,173	shob is right even really experienced field mushroom hunters have a hard time properly identifying every strain. and since some are harmful to us, its better to play it on the safe side __________________ Destroy Erase Improve Last edited by destroy_erase_improve : 03-25-05 at 01:00. Reason: typo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
expected urine test, but got saliva test is it possible to pass?	disturbed	*Resist & Rebel*	55	10-10-06 09:09
Gift from Hookaville Test pic	Invitro	Testing & Formating	2	06-01-05 21:43
resist/rebel Archive through January 18, 2004	roo	The Shroom Dump	556	04-22-04 04:14
resist/rebel Archive through February 10, 2004	sweetness	The Shroom Dump	452	02-09-04 19:34

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-24-05, 23:50	#2 (permalink)
shobimono Chat Admin Join Date: Jan 1973 Posts: 817	Would highly recommend against this. I would think it would be highly unreliable and very dangerous. The problem is you would have to test each mushroom. There are lookalikes and it would be foolhardy to test 1 mushroom and assume the mushroom growing next to it is the same if you don't know how to id mushrooms. (Which doesn't sound like you are confident enough to trust your identification or else you wouldn't be asking about this test) Learn to identify mushrooms, dont depend on shortcuts or you are just asking for trouble., and a mistake can hurt or even kill you.

03-25-05, 01:28	#4 (permalink)
kukukajoob Mycophiliac Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 31	No doubt each mushroom collected in the wild would require individual identification just to make sure you didn't pick a toxic specimen hiding along side the medicinal ones. One would expect to make good use of a field guide, spore prints, etc and just use the metol test as a backup; not to replace the need to know how to correctly ID. The metol field test is recommended in an article on id methods by myclologist John W. Allen on the shroomery website: http://www.shroomery.org/index/par/24343/pag/7 The article implies this an effective testing method but only covers it briefly. I'm just looking for anecdotal reports from anyone who has used this tech in the field and can add to the available data. Certainly the cautionary is well taken; one accidental ingestion of a galerina marginata would end one's career as an amateur mycologist.